Plum City – (AbelDanger.net): United States Marine Field McConnell has linked Serco’s visa-ammo mortar murders of two former SEALs, Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods, on the roof of the CIA annex in Benghazi on 9/12/12 through Base One Technologies’ honey-pot server in the Bronx to ongoing Black Hand* navigators’ spoofs of the State Department by Clinton Foundation banker, HSBC.

CIA Requests For Help in Benghazi Attack Denied

Black Hand* – HSBC’s long-range drug-hub navigators with a Serco “License to Track, Film and Kill” for the City of London’s Honourable Artillery Company 1537; Master Mariners and Air Pilots (formerly GAPAN) 1929, and Ancient and Honorable Artillery Company of Massachusetts 1638 – whose alumni include U.S. Presidents James Monroe, Chester Alan Arthur, Calvin Coolidge and John F. Kennedy and – perhaps – Barack ‘Choom Gang’ Obama.

McConnell notes that Serco banker HSBC’s clients in Geneva have financed the Clinton Foundation from its launch in 2001 and financed the State Department’s Base One honeypot server in the Bronx, launched on February 15, 1994 by then-Secretary of State Colin Powell.

McConnell notes that the Clinton administration outsourced the operation of the National Visa Center and the Base One honey-pot server to Serco in 1994 while the Obama administration outsourced the operation of the U.S. Defense Ammunition Center to Serco in 2009.

“The military attaché to the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli told Congress the first attack showed some advance planning.

The Libyan police officer guarding the diplomatic compound fled as it began.

The defence attaché, whose name wasn’t released, suggested the attackers “had something on the shelf” — an outline of a plan based on previously obtained information about the compound and its security measures, so they were ready to strike when the opportunity arose.

“They came in, and they had a sense of purpose, and I think it sometimes gets confused because you had looters and everyone else coming in,” he said. “It was less than kind of full, thought-out, methodical.”

Ham testified that the second attack, which killed security officers Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty at the annex a mile from the diplomatic compound where the assault began the night before, showed clear military training. It was probably the work of a new team of militants, taking advantage after reports of violence at the first site and American vulnerability.

2nd attack showed ‘degree of sophistication’
“Given the precision of the attack, it was a well-trained mortar crew, and in my estimation they probably had a well-trained observer,” said Ham, who headed the U.S. command in Africa. The second attack showed “a degree of sophistication and military training that is relatively unusual and certainly, I think, indicates that this was not a pickup team. This was not a couple of guys who just found a mortar someplace.”

McConnell believes HSBC clients spoofed the Clinton State Department with an “Innocence of Muslims” video, apparently webcast through the Base One server to trigger a mob attack on the Benghazi mission and serve as a decoy for the visa-ammo mortar murders at the CIA annexe.

McConnell believes that HSBC clients used the Base One server to spoof Hillary Clinton and the State Department into expecting a mob attack on the diplomatic mission in Benghazi on 9/11/12 when the real target was the nearby CIA Annexe, a vital hub in the supply chain used by Black Hand navigators to feed Serco visas and ammo to ISIS crime groups in Syria and Northern Iraq.

McConnell believes that HSBC spoofed the Clinton State Department into outsourcing security in Benghazi to Black Hand navigators with the Blue Mountain Group who allegedly used Serco visas and ammo and Base One drone intelligence to ambush and kill Doherty and Woods.

Copy of SERCO GROUP PLC: List of Subsidiaries AND Shareholders! (Mobile Playback Version) [Note that HSBC is Serco’s banker and one of Serco’s major shareholders with Her Majesty’s Government and its funds]

Fox News has learned from sources
who were on the ground in Benghazi that an urgent request from the CIA annex
for military back-up during the attack on the U.S. consulate and subsequent
attack several hours later on the annex itself was denied by the CIA chain of
command — who also told the CIA operators twice to “stand down”
rather than help the ambassador’s team when shots were heard at approximately
9:40 p.m. in Benghazi on Sept. 11.

Former Navy SEAL
Tyrone Woods was part of a small team who was at the CIA annex about a mile
from the U.S. consulate where Ambassador Chris Stevens and his team came under
attack. When he and others heard the shots fired, they informed their
higher-ups at the annex to tell them what they were hearing and requested
permission to go to the consulate and help out. They were told to “stand
down,” according to sources familiar with the exchange. Soon after, they
were again told to “stand down.”

Woods and at least two
others ignored those orders and made their way to the consulate which at that
point was on fire. Shots were exchanged. The rescue team from the CIA annex
evacuated those who remained at the consulate and Sean Smith, who had been
killed in the initial attack. They could not find the ambassador and returned
to the CIA annex at about midnight.

At that point, they
called again for military support and help because they were taking fire at the
CIA safe house, or annex. The request was denied. There were no communications
problems at the annex, according those present at the compound. The team was in
constant radio contact with their headquarters. In fact, at least one member of
the team was on the roof of the annex manning a heavy machine gun when mortars
were fired at the CIA compound. The security officer had a laser on the target
that was firing and repeatedly requested back-up support from a Spectre
gunship, which is commonly used by U.S. Special Operations forces to provide
support to Special Operations teams on the ground involved in intense
firefights.

CIA spokeswoman
Jennifer Youngblood, though, denied the claims that requests for support were
turned down.”

Newly revealed
testimony from top military commanders involved in the U.S. response to the
Benghazi attacks suggests that the perpetrators of a second, dawn attack on a
CIA complex probably were different from those who penetrated the U.S.
diplomatic mission the evening before and set it ablaze, killing Ambassador
Chris Stevens and another American.

The second attack,
which killed two security contractors, showed clear military training, retired
Gen. Carter Ham told Congress in closed-door testimony released late Wednesday.
The assault probably was the work of a new team of militants, seizing on
reports of violence at the diplomatic mission the night before and hitting the
Americans while they were most vulnerable.

The testimony, which
The Associated Press was able to read ahead of its release, could clarify for
the first time the events of Sept. 11, 2012, that have stirred bitter
recriminations in the U.S., including Republican-led congressional
investigations and campaign-season denunciations of the Obama administration,
which made inaccurate statements about the Libyan attacks.

The testimony
underscores a key detail that sometimes has been lost in the debate: that the
attacks were two distinct events over two days on two different buildings,
perhaps by unrelated groups.

1st attack remains
mysterious

The U.S. government
still has not fully characterized the first attack in which, according to Ham
and eight other military officers, men who seemed familiar with the lightly
protected diplomatic compound breached it and set it on fire, killing Stevens
and communications specialist Sean Smith. A disorganized mob of looters then
overran the facility.

‘Given the precision
of the attack, it was a well-trained mortar crew, and in my estimation they
probably had a well-trained observer … This was not a couple of guys who
just found a mortar someplace.’- Gen. Carter Ham, during Congressional
testimony

In testimony to two
House panels earlier this year, the officers said that commanders didn’t have
the information they needed to understand the nature of the attack, that they
were unaware of the extent of the U.S. presence in Benghazi at the time and
they were convinced erroneously for a time that they were facing a hostage
crisis without the ability to move military assets into place that would be of
any use.

The testimony reveals
how little information the military had on which to base an urgent response.

Two House panels —
Armed Services and Oversight and Government Reform — conducted interviews with
the nine officers on separate days from January to April.

Four Americans died in
Benghazi, including Stevens. To this day, despite the investigations, it’s not
clear if the violence resulted from a
well-planned, multiphase military-type assault or from a loosely
connected, escalating chain of events.

1st assault not
‘methodical’

In their testimony,
military officials expressed some uncertainty about the first attack,
describing protests and looting in an assault that lasted about 45 minutes.

The military attaché
to the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli told Congress the first attack showed some
advance planning. The Libyan police officer guarding the diplomatic compound
fled as it began.

The defence attaché,
whose name wasn’t released, suggested the attackers “had something on the
shelf” — an outline of a plan based on previously obtained information
about the compound and its security measures, so they were ready to strike when
the opportunity arose.

“They came in,
and they had a sense of purpose, and I think it sometimes gets confused because
you had looters and everyone else coming in,” he said. “It was less
than kind of full, thought-out, methodical.”

Ham testified that the
second attack, which killed security officers Tyrone Woods and
Glen Doherty at the annex a mile from the diplomatic compound where
the assault began the night before, showed clear military training. It was
probably the work of a new team of militants, taking advantage after reports of
violence at the first site and American vulnerability.

2nd attack showed
‘degree of sophistication’

“Given the
precision of the attack, it was a well-trained mortar crew, and in my
estimation they probably had a well-trained observer,” said Ham, who
headed the U.S. command in Africa. The second attack showed “a degree of
sophistication and military training that is relatively unusual and certainly,
I think, indicates that this was not a pickup team. This was not a couple of
guys who just found a mortar someplace.”

Ham said the nearly
eight-hour time lapse between the two attacks also seemed significant. “If
the team (that launched the second attack) was already there, then why didn’t
they shoot sooner?” he asked.

“I think it’s
reasonable that a team came from outside of Benghazi,” he said of the
second attack in testimony on April 9. Violent extremists saw an opportunity
“and said, `Let’s get somebody there.”‘ He also acknowledged that the
absence of American security personnel on the ground soon enough after the
first attack “allowed sufficient time for the second attack to be
organized and conducted,” he said.

Stevens had gone to
Benghazi from the embassy in Tripoli to open a cultural centre, State
Department officials said.

Obama, re-election,
and ‘talking points’

The attacks came as
President Barack Obama was in a close re-election battle, campaigning in part
on the contention that al-Qaeda no longer posed a significant threat
to the United States and that, blending the economy and the fight against
terrorism, General Motors was alive but “Osama bin Laden is
dead.” A terror attack on American assets could have damaged that
argument.

Five days after the
attack, after feverish email exchanges about her “talking points”
among national security staff members and their spokesmen, U.N. Ambassador
Susan Rice linked the Benghazi attacks to protests in Tunisia and Cairo over an
anti-Islam video. Weeks later, U.S. officials retracted that account but never
fully articulated a new one.

Republicans seized on
the inaccuracies, contending that the Obama administration was covering up a
terror attack for political gain.

Several congressional
and independent investigations have faulted the State Department for inadequate
security, but they have not provided a full reading of who was involved in the
violence, what the motives were and how they could pull off such a seemingly
complicated, multipronged assault.

People on both sides
of the debate tend to link the two incidents as one attack.

Confusion reigned

The congressional
testimony that distinguishes the attacks came from military officials in
Tripoli or, like Ham, coordinating the response in Washington. Most have never
given a public account. But they agreed that confusion reigned from the outset.

“We’re under attack,”
was the first report the military received from Benghazi. That message came
from Stevens’ entourage to Tripoli in the late afternoon of Sept. 11. Word was
relayed to the defence attache, who reported up the chain of command.

That report gave no
indication about the size or intensity of the attack.

The defence attache
testified that the assault on the diplomatic mission was followed by a mob that
complicated and confused the situation.

He said of the
original attackers, “I don’t think they were on the objective, so to
speak, longer than 45 minutes. They kind of got on, did their business, and
left.” For hours after that, he said, there were looters and “people
throwing stuff and you see the graffiti and things like that.”

Once the first attack
ended around 10 p.m., the military moved to evacuate Americans from Benghazi,
while preparing for what it erroneously believed might have been an emerging
hostage situation involving Stevens.

Nearly 8 hours between
attacks

In fact, Stevens died
of smoke inhalation after the diplomatic post was set on fire in the first
attack.

Seven-and-a-half hours
later, at dawn, mortars crashed on a CIA compound that had been unknown to top
military commanders.

The military worked up
a response on numerous fronts.

At one point, fewer
than 10 U.S. military personnel in Libya were grappling with the mortar and
rocket-propelled grenade attack on Americans who had taken cover at the CIA
facility and, some 600 miles away, the evacuation of about three dozen people
from the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli by a convoy of armoured vehicles.

An unarmed Predator
drone conducting an operation nearby in eastern Libya had
been repositioned over Benghazi, yet offered limited assistance
during the nighttime and with no intelligence to guide it. A standby force
training in Croatia was ordered to Sicily, while another farther afield was
mobilized. Neither was nearly ready in time to intervene during the first
45-minute attack and couldn’t predict the quick mortar attack the next morning.
An anti-terrorism support team in Spain was deployed, though it, too, was hours
away.

American
reinforcements of a six-man security team, including two military personnel,
were held up at the Benghazi airport for hours by Libyan authorities. Drone
images and intelligence hadn’t provided indications of a new attack, but word
eventually came from two special forces troops who had made it to the annex and
reported casualties from the dawn attack up the chain of command.

Ahmed
Abu Khattala detained last month

In Tripoli, military
and embassy officials were evacuating the embassy there and destroying computer
hardware and sensitive information.

The administration
last month apprehended its first suspect, Ahmed Abu Khattala, and
brought him to the United States to stand trial on terrorism charges.

The Justice Department
maintains in court documents that Abu Khattala was involved in
both attacks, and it describes the first breach on the diplomatic post as
equally sophisticated. The government said a group of about 20 men, armed with
AK-47- rifles, handguns and rocket-propelled grenade launchers, stormed the
diplomatic facility in the first attack.

Abu Khattala
supervised the looting after Americans fled, the government says, and then
returned to the camp of the Islamist militant group Ansar al-Sharia, where the
Justice Department says a large force began assembling for the second attack.

Justice Department
tells different tale

The Justice Department
provided no supporting documentation for those conclusions. They also reflect
the divisions among current and former government officials about the two
attacks.

In her book Hard
Choices, former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton wrote that there
were scores of attackers with different motives. “It is inaccurate to
state that every single one of them was influenced by this hateful video. It is
equally inaccurate to state that none of them were. Both assertions defy not
only the evidence but logic as well.”

Abu Khattala’s lawyer
says the government has failed to show that he was connected to either attack.

Ham, who happened to
be in Washington that week, briefed defence Secretary Leon Panetta and Joint
Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey. They informed the president.

Many of the military
officials said they didn’t even know about the diplomatic mission in Benghazi,
let alone the CIA’s clandestine installation nearby. Few knew of Stevens
visiting the city that day. Given all of the confusion, Ham said there was one
thing he clearly would have done differently: “Advise the ambassador to
not go to Benghazi.”

It was supposed to be
his last assignment working security and surveillance for the CIA. Glen
Doherty, the former Navy SEAL who was working for the CIA’s Global Response
staff in Libya on Sept. 11 last year, was in the capital of Tripoli when the
call for help came from the diplomatic mission in Benghazi — a
“consulate” in name only.

“Greg, Greg, we
are under attack,” were the last words from Ambassador Chris Stevens to
his deputy Greg Hicks over the phone from Benghazi shortly after the attack
began around 9:30 p.m.

“If you don’t get
here we are going to die,” the radio operator at the tactical operations
center in Benghazi pronounced on the radio from the consulate.

Fox News has learned
more details about Doherty’s actions, as he and others scrambled to try and
save the U.S. team after those pleas for help.

Doherty was part of
the quick reaction force that left Tripoli to help rescue the ambassador and
his team at the consulate, as well as the 21 CIA personnel at the CIA annex one
mile from where Stevens’ and the others came under attack.

Doherty left Tripoli
at about midnight local time, after chartering a local plane for the rescue.
There were no U.S. air assets in Tripoli. He and the quick reaction force
arrived at the CIA annex at 5:15 a.m. after being delayed for several hours at
the Benghazi airport by the Libyans. The CIA annex, a fortress-like compound
with several buildings, is where the Americans in Benghazi had retreated and
the body of State Department official Sean Smith had been brought after the
initial attack. At the time, Stevens was still missing.

Doherty joined Tyrone
Woods, another highly trained former SEAL, on the roof of one of the buildings
at the CIA annex. Within minutes, mortars were fired. Doherty and Woods were
both killed.

Fox News has obtained
a video of Doherty before he died that was compiled by his friends from the
outtakes of an NBC series that Doherty worked on in 2009. The series, The
Wanted, was a reality show that involved looking for war criminals around the
world.

Doherty provided
security and surveillance for the show’s production team as it chased in one
case a well-known financier of the 9/11 attacks through the streets of Hamburg.
Doherty talks about the car chases and how he managed to stay awake on
stake-outs and discusses his impressions of his friends Adam, Roger and Scott,
whom he protected on those shoots. The video is being shown with the permission
of Doherty’s mother, Barbara, to provide insight into who Doherty was and why
the nation should honor his service.

Doherty’s Libya
assignment was supposed to be his last for the CIA. He had been offered a more
comfortable job in the private sector that would have allowed him to get out of
the line of fire. He told his future employer that he had one last job to do.
That job was in Libya. On Sept. 11, his last assignment was in
Benghazi.

Jennifer Griffin
currently serves as a national security correspondent for FOX News Channel .
She joined FNC in October 1999 as a Jerusalem-based correspondent.”

Hillary Clinton didn’t
take a basic precaution with her personal e-mail system to prevent hackers from
impersonating or “spoofing” her identity in messages to close
associates, according to former U.S. officials familiar with her e-mail system
and other cyber-security experts.

This vulnerability put
anyone who was in communication with her clintonemail.com account while she was
secretary of state at risk of being hacked. Clinton said at the United Nations
last week that there were no security breaches of her personal e-mail server,
which she used to send and receive more than 60,000 professional and personal
e-mails. But former cyber-security officials and experts told us that there
were gaps in the system.

According to publicly
available information, whoever administrated the system didn’t enable what’s
called a Sender Policy Framework, or SPF, a simple setting that would prevent
hackers sending e-mails that appear to be from clintonemail.com. SPF is a basic
and highly recommended security precaution for people who set
up their own servers. Here is a security evaluation of Clinton’s server
by SenderScore:

Experts told us that
oversight was just one flaw of a security system that would have been
relatively easy for foreign intelligence services and others to exploit.
“I have no doubt in my mind that this thing was penetrated by multiple
foreign powers, to assume otherwise is to put blinders on,” said Bob Gourley,
the chief technology officer at the Defense Intelligence Agency from 2005 to
2008 and the founder of Cognitio, a cybersecurity consultancy.

“If a Sender
Policy Framework was not in use, they could send an e-mail that looks like it
comes from her to, say, the ambassador of France that says, ‘leave the back
door open to the residence a package is coming,'” added Gourley. “Or
a malicious person could send an e-mail to a foreign dignitary meant to cause
an international incident or confuse U.S. foreign policy.”

Spoofing a senior
official’s e-mail identity is also an easy way to conduct “spear
phishing” attacks, where an attacker sends a personally crafted e-mail
that appears to come from a trusted source. Once the target opens it, his own
system can be compromised. Clinton said she e-mailed with dozens of State
Department and White House officials using her server, including President
Barack Obama.

Spear phishing has caused
problems for the government in the past. In October 2012, the White House confirmed that hackers linked to the Chinese government had penetrated sensitive but unclassified computer systems using the
technique. Just last week, the State Department shut down its entire
e-mail system after attacks by hackers suspected to be Russian.

There’s no evidence
that Clinton’s e-mail server was linked to those or any other specific attacks.
And it’s worth noting that the State Department’s e-mail domain does not have
SPF enabled. Thus, experts point out, it may also have been vulnerable to
hacking during her time as secretary.

Nick Merrill, a
spokesman for Clinton’s personal office, declined to comment on the SPF issue,
telling us that she took several security precautions when setting up her
server, including hiring third-party experts. “Robust protections were put in
place and additional upgrades and techniques were employed over time as they
became available,” he said. “There was never evidence of a breach, nor any
unauthorized intrusions.”

The problem with such
confidence is that if hackers exploited the SPF vulnerability, Clinton’s office
would likely never have known her domain name, which has been public information since March of 2013, was being used
surreptitiously.

Merrill declined to
say who has been in charge of maintaining the server or ensuring its security
since 2009 [Base One Technologies, mentored by Serco]. This would be a good
question to have answered. It would be important to know, for instance, what
sort of security vetting the employees overseeing the server received.

It would be useful to
know, too, if the federal agencies that protect sensitive government
communications — the FBI and the NSA — were aware of the server’s existence
and helped to provide security. Clinton has refused to clarify this issue,
saying only that the server “had numerous safeguards and was on
property guarded by the Secret Service In 2008. Chinese hackers penetrated the e-mail systems of both the Barack Obama and John McCain
campaigns, which were operating on commercial systems. After the hacks were
discovered, the FBI lent its assistance and the hacks stopped.

E-mails “that run
on commercial services are vulnerable to collection,” said James A. Lewis, who
held senior technology posts at the White House and State Department and
now directs the technology and public policy program at the Center for
Strategic and International Studies. Lewis, who authored “Cybersecurity for the
44th Presidency,” a report commissioned by a bipartisan House panel in 2007,
added: “I don’t think people realize how much of this information is available
to foreign intelligence services.”

Until team Clinton
answers vital questions about exactly what safeguards were in place in
Chappaqua, New York, we won’t know how likely it was that sensitive
communications at the highest level of government may have ended up in
unfriendly hands.

Information Security
Planning is the process whereby an organization seeks to protect its
operations and assets from data theft or computer hackers that seek to obtain
unauthorized information or sabotage business operations. Without a properly
planned and managed Information Security Plan, an organization runs the risk
of law suits, loss of data, compromised operations and loss of reputation.
Our experts have secured some of the world largest and most complex
commercial and carrier networks, as well as conducted extensive analysis and
implementation work on some of the Federal Government’s most sensitive and
critical environments, such as the FAA.

Base One
Technologies takes your information security needs seriously! We conduct
business analysis, install solutions and protect your network from
unauthorized entry and data loss. We are there in the beginning to provide
guidance and support to your data security program, through to implementation
and eventually during the support life cycle providing process and procedures
for incident reporting, analysis and counter measures.

Provides computer
security integration for web server and traditional client-server based
applications. We secure environments up to as many layers as required by our
clients’ policies, industry practices, and regulating bodies – including the
desktop and user experience as required.

Develops, implements and supports
Information Security Counter measures such as honey-pots
and evidence logging and incident documentation processes and
solutions.”

“Contact

111 Eighth Avenue
New York, NY 10011

Description

Base One Technologies,
Ltd. is a DOMESTIC BUSINESS CORPORATION, located in New York, NY and was formed
on Feb 15, 1994. This file was obtained
from the Secretary of State and has a file
number of 1795583.

This business was
created 7,695 days ago in the New York SOS Office and the registered agent is C
T Corporation System that does business at 111 Eighth Avenue , New York in New
York.

After conducting a
search for principals and owners of Base One Technologies, Ltd., we were able
to find 2 owners and/or executives. Their information is listed below.

NEW ROCHELLE,
NY–(Marketwire – September 2, 2008) – Base One Technologies, Inc. is pleased
to announce that it has sold its affiliate, Base One Technologies Ltd., to
Apptis Inc. Base One Technologies, Inc. will continue to compete in the
government space as an 8(a), HubZone and Woman Owned Small Disadvantage
Company. Base One Technologies, Inc. is an IT Engineering and Technical
Services company founded in 1994. Base One has a Top Secret Facilities
Clearance and specializes in: Enterprise Architecture, Network Infrastructure
Support, Data Security, Software & Database Services, Disaster Recovery
& Contingency Planning, and Independent Validation & Verification. Base
One is a privately-held organization with headquarters in New Rochelle, NY. For
more information visit: www.base-one.com.

“Serco’s Office of Partner Relations (OPR) helps facilitate our aggressive small business utilization and growth
strategies. Through the OPR, Serco mentors four local small businesses
under formal Mentor Protégé Agreements: Three sponsored by DHS (Base One
Technologies, TSymmetry, Inc., and HeiTech Services, Inc.,) and the
fourth sponsored by GSA (DKW Communications, Inc.). Serco and HeiTech Services
were awarded the 2007 DHS Mentor Protégé Team Award for exceeding our mentoring
goals.” http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/100515p.pdf

“Opened in 1994 as the successor to the
Transitional Immigrant Visa Processing Center in Rosslyn, Va., the NVC
centralizes all immigrant visa preprocessing and appointment scheduling for
overseas posts. The NVC collects paperwork and fees before forwarding a
case, ready for adjudication, to the responsible post.

The center also handles immigrant and fiancé visa petitions, and while it does
not adjudicate visa applications, it provides technical assistance and support
to visa-adjudicating consular officials overseas.

Only two Foreign Service officers, the director and deputy director, work at
the center, along with just five Civil Service employees. They work with almost
500 contract employees doing preprocessing of visas, making the center one of
the largest employers in the Portsmouth area.

The contractor, Serco, Inc., has worked with the NVC since its inception and
with the Department for almost 18 years.

The NVC houses more than 2.6 million immigrant visa files, receives almost two
million pieces of mail per year and received more than half a million petitions
from the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) in 2011. Its file
rooms’ high-density shelves are stacked floor-to-ceiling with files, each a
collection of someone’s hopes and dreams and each requiring proper
handling.
….

The NVC also preprocesses the chief of mission (COM) application required for
the filing of a petition for a Special Immigrant Visa (SIV). Such visas, for
foreign nationals who have performed services for the U.S. government in Iraq
and Afghanistan, require COM concurrence before the applicant can file a
petition with USCIS. The NVC collects the requisite documents from such
applicants and, when complete, forwards the package to the U.S. embassies in
Baghdad or Kabul for COM approval”

“Update on Serco’s Strategy Review including the Contract & Balance
Sheet Reviews; capital structure and funding; latest trading and outlook
Date : 10 November 2014
THIS ANNOUNCEMENT AND THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS RESTRICTED AND IS NOT
FOR RELEASE, PUBLICATION OR DISTRIBUTION, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, IN WHOLE OR
IN PART, IN, INTO OR FROM THE UNITED STATES, CANADA, AUSTRALIA, JAPAN, SOUTH
AFRICA OR ANY OTHER JURISDICTION IN WHICH THE SAME WOULD BE UNLAWFUL. PLEASE
SEE THE IMPORTANT NOTICE AT THE END OF THIS ANNOUNCEMENT.

In the Americas Division, our work for the US Affordable [Obama] Care Act (ACA)
has begun an expanded first option year. Other awards in the period included:
career transition services for US soldiers; health outreach services for the US
Naval Reserve; deployable medical systems solutions also for the Navy; and two
contracts for fleet maintenance services for commercial clients. In total, the
ACA and all other awards in the period are valued at over $550m. Meanwhile, our
contract supporting the Department of State’s National Visa
Center and Kentucky Consular Center (NVC/KCC) came to an end during the
period, as did some Acquisition and Program Management support work for US intelligence
agency customers. C4I2TSR services for the US Air Force and Naval
installation task order work under the Sea Enterprise frameworks are also
reducing. …

5 comments

surely the copious amount of information shown here has got to sink the Clinton bitch once and for all ? the woman is more sneaky than hill william the jizz lobber., and she is just as hopeless as him at covering her tracks. bet the security guys who were denied assistance from the gutless ptb broke a few jaws once they landed back at stateside, I would be filthy if I was put in harms way ,then shat on by my own when the SHTF. THANKS FOR THE INPUT ABEL DANGER …….HOLD FAST.